Hungary Passes New Constitution, which Invokes St. Stephen, Protects Family, Marriage, and Condemns Abortion

[Jehoshua]

I don’t buy this. To be a free citizen, a person must not be required to assent to the beliefs of any religion. This constitution does that. Was the same sort of language used when Hungary was loyal ally of Nazi Germany/

How is the new constitution requiring assent. All it does is invoke the memory of the founder of the hungarian state the saintly by any definition St Stephen and acknowledge the christian foundation of the hungarian people. I hardly see how this requires one to assent to christian beliefs or somehow be a christian. One could still be muslim or hindu and fairly acknowledge the christian foundation of hungarian society and history.

As has been said, the predominant definition of freedom of religion does not mean the exclusion of religion from the public sphere, it means the freedom to practice ones religion freely without state proscription or control.

I would like to hear an explanation from you as to how the newly promulgated hungarian constitution violates freedom of religion in your opinion.

 

[Hokomai]

How is the new constitution requiring assent. All it does is invoke the memory of the founder of the hungarian state the saintly by any definition St Stephen and acknowledge the christian foundation of the hungarian people. I hardly see how this requires one to assent to christian beliefs or somehow be a christian. One could still be muslim or hindu and fairly acknowledge the christian foundation of hungarian society and history.

As has been said, the predominant definition of freedom of religion does not mean the exclusion of religion from the public sphere, it means the freedom to practice ones religion freely without state proscription or control.

I would like to hear an explanation from you as to how the newly promulgated hungarian constitution violates freedom of religion in your opinion.

Well, assuming that some sort of fidelity to the constitution is required for participation in society, this means that to do so people must express fidelity to religious ideas like sainthood, and the claim that a society is founded in some way on the principles of a religion. This is what they do in Saudi Arabia.

 

[Hokomai]

The ECHR ruling on the Lautsi & Ors v Italy case in respect of the display of crucifixes in Italian schools upheld the Christian heritage of a Member State.

To a non-Christian this is merely an horrific image of a person being tortured to death. Without the Christian belief it is an obviously inappropriate image for a schoolroom. You can test this by asking how you would feel about other representations of torture in a schoolroom.

 

[Hokomai]

Freedom of religion is the freedom to worship the Living God, the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Freedom of religion is the freedom to be catholic.

That’s all it means and all it ever can mean. All systems of thought which deny the Living God are forms of abject slavery.

Thanks for making that clear, but do try thinking through the benefits of tolerance. maybe begin by thinking of a recently deceased religious leader and replacing the word ‘Catholic’ with 'Muslim".

 

[Santi2]

To a non-Christian this is merely an horrific image of a person being tortured to death. Without the Christian belief it is an obviously inappropriate image for a schoolroom.

It was held not to have any negative effect on non-Christians.

You can test this by asking how you would feel about other representations of torture in a schoolroom.

It would not bother me a jot. It could serve as an educational resource for students.

 

[Hokomai]

It was held not to have any negative effect on non-Christians.

It would not bother me a jot. It could serve as an educational resource for students.

I can’t insist it bother you of course, but I really think you should worry about why it would not.

 

[Santi2]

I can’t insist it bother you of course, but I really think you should worry about why it would not.

Nope. It does not worry me that I am not bothered a jot as I do not go about life seeking things to offend me.

 

[Te_Deum]

It’s just a shame that the European Union is going to force homosexual “marriage”, abortion and a host of other social ills into Hungary and other nations via the back-door.

 

[Andre1000]

To a non-Christian this is merely an horrific image of a person being tortured to death. Without the Christian belief it is an obviously inappropriate image for a schoolroom. You can test this by asking how you would feel about other representations of torture in a schoolroom.

I know a lot of non Christians and no one see a cross as horrific.
Only people who are intolerant and anti Christian hate a cross.

The soviet union was a secular state and had nothing to do whit religion freedom.

 

[Santi2]

It’s just a shame that the European Union is going to force homosexual “marriage”, abortion and a host of other social ills into Hungary and other nations via the back-door.

The only way the EU is going to be successful with interference on domestic laws is if the Hungarian government allows it. Hungary must be iron-fisted with its sovereignty.

 

[Adeodatus]

Thanks for making that clear, but do try thinking through the benefits of tolerance. maybe begin by thinking of a recently deceased religious leader and replacing the word ‘Catholic’ with 'Muslim".

Yes, that would completely alter the truth value of the statement.

When we talk about aviation and replace all instances of the word “fuel” with “Pepsi” we get a similar non-starter.

Critique by “word swap” is not logical.

 

[Te_Deum]

The only way the EU is going to be successful with interference on domestic laws is if the Hungarian government allows it. Hungary must be iron-fisted with its sovereignty.

Hungary will have to leave the EU then. Which would be brilliant of course. The EU is already planning on getting around this by forcing EU states to recognise marriages, adoptions etc., in other EU states. For example if a Hungarian lesbian couple got married in The Netherlands and adopted a child and went back to Hungary the Hungarians would need to recognise this.

 

[Flavius_Aetius]

Hungary will have to leave the EU then. Which would be brilliant of course. The EU is already planning on getting around this by forcing EU states to recognise marriages, adoptions etc., in other EU states. For example if a Hungarian lesbian couple got married in The Netherlands and adopted a child and went back to Hungary the Hungarians would need to recognise this.

Sad fact is; it isn’t likely that Hungary will leave the EU over these issues. No doubt the very thought of doing so will risk them becoming an economic pariah with other EU countries. No they HAVE to force down their destructive beliefs on everyone around them because only THEY know what’s right.

 

[Jehoshua]

@hokomai

Well since the constitution of Hungary merely acknowledges the historical foundation of the hungarian nation and the foundation of christianity in the history of its society without in any way implying a required acceptance as per its wording of saintly figures or the christian religion, I don;t see what your complaing about.

As has been repeatedly said, freedom of religion does not mean the exclusion of religion from teh public sphere, nor the absense of the universal moral law in the decision making decision making of a state. To intimate otherise is contrary to the notion of religious freedom itself and belies in general in the west an anti-christian attitude, rabid ultr-secularist atheism or both.

Unfortunately too many places have fallen under the sway of such ultra-secularism and while hypocritically claiming to have freedom of religion do not in truth have anything of the sort. The archetypical examplar of Brittain for example, where a christian couple were deemed unfit by a court to adopt a child because they refused to support homosexuality, or the man who had to go to court because his workplace refused to permit him to wear a cross, bible desecration in an ‘art’ gallery. These examples show the truth that Brittain is no longer religiously free and not to mention doing the same thing towards muslims would be unnacceptable.

 

[Santi2]

Hungary will have to leave the EU then. Which would be brilliant of course. The EU is already planning on getting around this by forcing EU states to recognise marriages, adoptions etc., in other EU states. For example if a Hungarian lesbian couple got married in The Netherlands and adopted a child and went back to Hungary the Hungarians would need to recognise this.

Why should Hungary leave the EU when Hungarians have allies within it in respect of shared moral and social issues? Also, the EU is governed by principles of subsidiarity and proportionality. It is limited to its competences and does not have jurisdiction over Member States’ domestic laws in respect of same-sex union.

Strasbourg court rules that states are not obliged to allow gay marriage…The Court went on to re-affirm that marriage has deep roots in societies and differs from one place to another. Considering this, it found it should not “rush to substitute its own judgment in the place of that of national authorities.”…
guardian.co.uk/law/2010/jun/24/european-court-of-human-rights-civil-partnerships

1. “… the question whether or not to allow same-sex marriage is left to regulation by the national law of the Contracting State.
2. In that connection the Court observes that marriage has deep-rooted social and cultural connotations which may differ largely from one society to another. The Court reiterates that it must not rush to substitute its own judgment in place of that of the national authorities, who are best placed to assess and respond to the needs of society”.
   bailii.org/eu/cases/ECHR/2010/995.html

 

[Joseph_L_Varga]

Why should Hungary leave the EU when Hungarians have allies within it in respect of shared moral and social issues? Also, the EU is governed by principles of subsidiarity and proportionality. It is limited to its competences and does not have jurisdiction over Member States’ domestic laws in respect of same-sex union.

I hope Poland will surely take a strong stand against gay marriage and abortion. I’m also familiar with Romanian culture - Romania has returned to its Christian roots (mostly Eastern Orthodox - but they are extremely close to us Catholics theologically - the practice of homosexuality and abortion are forbidden) with a fervor right after the anti-Communist revolution of December 1989. I quite simply cannot imagine the Romanian or the Hungarian population agreeing with gay marriage. I don’t know the exact abortion laws right now in Hungary, but abortion is legal for the first 6 weeks of pregnancy in Romania, and forbidden afterwards. I have some hope that countries like Poland, Hungary, Romania could form a united front (maybe with Ireland, too? also, how about Italy? how about Belgium - it used to be Catholic) and stand strong on Christian values. It looks like countries such as Britain, Netherlands, Germany push for the un-Christian stuff but maybe other countries could form an alliance and push back? If Britain wants every single abomination under the sun, at least it should leave those other countries alone who are disagreeing and do not wish to follow Britain’s example - after all they are sovereign countries, why should they allow Britain or Germany to dictate them what to do?

I’m not a legal expert, I’m just saying this because I used to live in both Romania and Hungary, and I am familiar with the thinking of those two people. And I’m holding out hope for Poland, Ireland, Italy and perhaps other countries. Am I too optimistic?

P.S. Sorry Santi2 and other posters from UK, Germany, Netherlands - I did not mean my post as a swipe at your country. I know sometimes politicians push for things that their own electorate rejects. Hungary also had a Socialist-Liberal Democrat coalition for 12 years out of the last 20, and they would have surely agreed to every single un-Christian and anti-Christian measure.

I also wonder how about Spain and Portugal, countries with a great Catholic heritage? Won’t they fight back?

 

[Santi2]

I hope Poland will surely take a strong stand against gay marriage and abortion. I’m also familiar with Romanian culture - Romania has returned to its Christian roots (mostly Eastern Orthodox - but they are extremely close to us Catholics theologically - the practice of homosexuality and abortion are forbidden) with a fervor right after the anti-Communist revolution of December 1989. I quite simply cannot imagine the Romanian or the Hungarian population agreeing with gay marriage. I don’t know the exact abortion laws right now in Hungary, but abortion is legal for the first 6 weeks of pregnancy in Romania, and forbidden afterwards. I have some hope that countries like Poland, Hungary, Romania could form a united front (maybe with Ireland, too? also, how about Italy? how about Belgium - it used to be Catholic) and stand strong on Christian values. It looks like countries such as Britain, Netherlands, Germany push for the un-Christian stuff but maybe other countries could form an alliance and push back? If Britain wants every single abomination under the sun, at least it should leave those other countries alone who are disagreeing and do not wish to follow Britain’s example - after all they are sovereign countries, why should they allow Britain or Germany to dictate them what to do?

The proposed mutual recognition policy is under public consultation within the EU. And, whilst there is a strong NGO gay advocacy as well as supportive Member States for cross-border policies on recognition of same-sex union, there is also strong opposition because it is an infringement of national sovereignty. Obligations for recognition cannot be imposed on a Member States where national laws are non-existent in respect of same sex unions. Also, Art 81.3 of the TFEU states that any measures aimed at legal harmonisation affecting family law requires unanimity of all Member States. No EU law that entails a change of family law in a Member State can be passed by a simple majority but needs the consent of all Member States.
eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:C:2008:115:0047:0199:ENDF

Together with EU law and case precedent on subsidiarity, there is also a rising tide against the EU and its attempt to monopolise the framework of policies that are unmindful of the cultural and religious heritage of Member States.

I’m not a legal expert, I’m just saying this because I used to live in both Romania and Hungary, and I am familiar with the thinking of those two people. And I’m holding out hope for Poland, Ireland, Italy and perhaps other countries. Am I too optimistic?

All four do not recognise same-sex marriage albeit Poland and Ireland have allowed civil unions.

P.S. Sorry Santi2 and other posters from UK, Germany, Netherlands - I did not mean my post as a swipe at your country. I know sometimes politicians push for things that their own electorate rejects. Hungary also had a Socialist-Liberal Democrat coalition for 12 years out of the last 20, and they would have surely agreed to every single un-Christian and anti-Christian measure.

No offence taken. We take a swipe at our country as well when it had gone off rail with its Judeo-Christian heritage.

I also wonder how about Spain and Portugal, countries with a great Catholic heritage? Won’t they fight back?

Sadly, both Catholic countries have allowed same-sex “marriage” .

 

[numealinesimpet]

Why should Hungary leave the EU when Hungarians have allies within it in respect of shared moral and social issues? Also, the EU is governed by principles of subsidiarity and proportionality. It is limited to its competences and does not have jurisdiction over Member States’ domestic laws in respect of same-sex union.

I can’t agree there. It’s the opposite. their powers are open-ended and self-adjustable, without necessary reference to a single voter. I’m not sure whether or not the whole thing was a clear plan from the beginning, but the way the European Economic Community warped into the EU super-state is a textbook example of power-grabbing by stealth. Here in Ireland, because of our written Constitution, there had to be a series of referendums. Each one had an ostensive purpose, but power-grabbing provisions were each time buried in the fine print. For example, Ireland should never have joined the euro. Neither should the other small countries. Those without a written constitution were simply dragged into it (except for spirited United Kingdom). The decision to abolish our currency was not debated at all, and the provision was buried in paragraph 24 (or whatever) of the referendum supposedly about something else. It started as an economic co-operation zone of free nations, and now it is one of the most wasteful, intrusive, non-accountable, and profoundly anti-Christian institutions in the world. Compare the rival EFTA (European Free Trade Association) to see the difference.
There is no legal provision for opting out of the EU, and the EU constitution states that it takes precedence over national parliaments. If they saw fit to enfore laws requiring abortion, same-sex marriage etc, the member states would discover that they no longer had the legal power to resist. the only reason they haven’t done this so far is that the member states (including, alas, Ireland) have mostly gone along with the trends towards anti-christian Liberalism, and hence they haven’t needed to take the velvet glove off the iron fist. Once they do it once, they won’t be able to maintain the facade. History would truly repeat itself if the brave Hungarians were the ones who, by their obduracy, forced their hand. Go for it, Huns! [Sorry, I couldn’t resist the last bit – I know ye are Magyars, not Huns… go for it anyway!]